Obama didn't know

[Faun]

Obamacare is just the defining symbol of his presidency and Obama didn't bother to call anyone to ask them if the system was working properly before they unleashed it on us.

Thanks Amelia

Yes, if he doesn't know the ACA is unconstitutional on many grounds, what can you expect. Denial is denial. The same brain that suppresses dissenting information to bypass "cognitive dissonance" is going to skew anything else that comes in or goes out.

both parties see that the other dismisses their points as invalid or lying.
they can't see they are doing the same from the other side's viewpoint.

If psychologists and political scientists aren't studying this dual phenomena, they should.

It is like living proof that our perceptions are indirectly influenced and co-determined by external perceptions of others or by the collective conscience, and we are limited in our ability to exercise free choice and free thought if we are "stuck" in this dual denial and projection going on. If we can forgive and get past it, it doesn't restrict our perception and decision making abilities. This really should be determined and addressed at the start.

It should be screened and resolved BEFORE making public policy, like other syndromes
similar: the bystander syndrome, the Stockholm syndrome, Munchausen syndrome.

It is some form of projection, where the person is unwilling to change it if (a) they would have to change other things related to it that are not convenient either (b) the other side is not changing their perception so they stay mutually stuck in the same trap

If you think ObamaCare is unconstitutional, you should push to have the U.S. Supreme Court consider that.

..... oh, wait .... they did!

 

[Faun]

http://tealmedia.com/http://tealmedia.com/

How in the world can this be so fucked up? Millions dumped into creating this system by a (non-American) company that is touted as being the best IT company in Canada


not only non American

but a no bid contract ta boot

another thing the lefty sheeple used to despise

Michigan is not in Canada.

Teal Media

Fail.

Teal Media: HealthCare.gov

Teal Media was selected as the lead visual design team on the redesign of HealthCare.gov. Check out The Atlantic article about the redesign.

As the lead visual design team, we created the “look and feel” only, for the “Learn” side, along with certain individual screens of the marketplace application.​

Teal didn't work on the database.

So? You do know there's more to a website besides the database, right?

 

[TemplarKormac]

What do you think he should have done?

Is that a serious question?

A. First he should have set benchmarks and made sure they were being met. If they were not, he should have found out in time to have something done about it.

B. If he still failed to take timely action in the past year, then having been suitably apprised about how woefully unready the site was, he shouldn't have rolled it out. He should have called that A-team in to fix things first.



Having a site which only the most determined people will sign up on could be worse for the future of the ACA than no one being able to sign up. The success of the ACA depends on a substantial volume of healthy people signing up. Among the people dedicated enough to hang on and try as many times as it finally takes, the percentage of unhealthy people could be catastrophically high.

He has been fighting against public perception since 2009. After the passage of the ACA he mounted a campaign to convince people they would like it once they saw what it could do for them. Public approval of the ACA has been under 50% for a long time (forever?). A good public reception of this rollout was vital. And he whiffed.

1. You clearly know very little, if anything, about software development.

2. Delays, glitches, going live with known problems, encountering unexpected issues; is commonplace.

3. But what is truly absurd is asserting the President of the United States should have been the one "setting benchmarks" and monitoring them.

4. He can take responsibility for it not starting up fully functional and on time since it's a product of his healthcare plan, but he should not have had anything to do with that site other than to delegate others to manage the development of it.

1. And neither do you. I on the other hand have some experience in website application and coding. Since when does a website have 5,000 lines of code per page and crash when loaded with only 100 constant connections? Why would you use a Canadian company to code it for you in the first place? What the fuck were these people doing launching a site that wasn't even alpha or beta tested? The software coding is shot, the coding is shot, and that will take probably three to six months to fix at best.

2. I'm sorry, even Robert Gibbs said this was no glitch. ROBERT EFFING GIBBS.

3. It does have his name on it, actually. His signature piece of legislation if I'm not mistaken.

4. Stop making excuses. He may not have known about it, but he should have exercised a bit of forethought before proposing the law in the first place. He was gullible enough to be hoodwinked by his own HHS Secretary. He lied about the numbers, made excuses, and now hes hiring the government equivalent of Geek Squad to repair the website.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Obamacare is just the defining symbol of his presidency and Obama didn't bother to call anyone to ask them if the system was working properly before they unleashed it on us.

Thanks Amelia

Yes, if he doesn't know the ACA is unconstitutional on many grounds, what can you expect. Denial is denial. The same brain that suppresses dissenting information to bypass "cognitive dissonance" is going to skew anything else that comes in or goes out.

both parties see that the other dismisses their points as invalid or lying.
they can't see they are doing the same from the other side's viewpoint.

If psychologists and political scientists aren't studying this dual phenomena, they should.

It is like living proof that our perceptions are indirectly influenced and co-determined by external perceptions of others or by the collective conscience, and we are limited in our ability to exercise free choice and free thought if we are "stuck" in this dual denial and projection going on. If we can forgive and get past it, it doesn't restrict our perception and decision making abilities. This really should be determined and addressed at the start.

It should be screened and resolved BEFORE making public policy, like other syndromes
similar: the bystander syndrome, the Stockholm syndrome, Munchausen syndrome.

It is some form of projection, where the person is unwilling to change it if (a) they would have to change other things related to it that are not convenient either (b) the other side is not changing their perception so they stay mutually stuck in the same trap

If you think ObamaCare is unconstitutional, you should push to have the U.S. Supreme Court consider that.

..... oh, wait .... they did!

You call that a tax? Pfft.

 

[TemplarKormac]

http://tealmedia.com/http://tealmedia.com/
Michigan is not in Canada.

Teal Media

Fail.

Teal Media: HealthCare.gov

Teal Media was selected as the lead visual design team on the redesign of HealthCare.gov. Check out The Atlantic article about the redesign.

As the lead visual design team, we created the “look and feel” only, for the “Learn” side, along with certain individual screens of the marketplace application.​

Teal didn't work on the database.

So? You do know there's more to a website besides the database, right?

Yeah, proper software coding.

 

[Faun]

Is that a serious question?

A. First he should have set benchmarks and made sure they were being met. If they were not, he should have found out in time to have something done about it.

B. If he still failed to take timely action in the past year, then having been suitably apprised about how woefully unready the site was, he shouldn't have rolled it out. He should have called that A-team in to fix things first.



Having a site which only the most determined people will sign up on could be worse for the future of the ACA than no one being able to sign up. The success of the ACA depends on a substantial volume of healthy people signing up. Among the people dedicated enough to hang on and try as many times as it finally takes, the percentage of unhealthy people could be catastrophically high.

He has been fighting against public perception since 2009. After the passage of the ACA he mounted a campaign to convince people they would like it once they saw what it could do for them. Public approval of the ACA has been under 50% for a long time (forever?). A good public reception of this rollout was vital. And he whiffed.

1. You clearly know very little, if anything, about software development.

2. Delays, glitches, going live with known problems, encountering unexpected issues; is commonplace.

3. But what is truly absurd is asserting the President of the United States should have been the one "setting benchmarks" and monitoring them.

4. He can take responsibility for it not starting up fully functional and on time since it's a product of his healthcare plan, but he should not have had anything to do with that site other than to delegate others to manage the development of it.

1. And neither do you. I on the other hand have some experience in website application and coding. Since when does a website have 5,000 lines of code per page and crash when loaded with only 100 constant connections? Why would you use a Canadian company to code it for you in the first place? What the fuck were these people doing launching a site that wasn't even alpha or beta tested? The software coding is shot, the coding is shot, and that will take probably three to six months to fix at best.

2. I'm sorry, even Robert Gibbs said this was no glitch. ROBERT EFFING GIBBS.

3. It does have his name on it, actually. His signature piece of legislation if I'm not mistaken.

4. Stop making excuses. He may not have known about it, but he should have exercised a bit of forethought before proposing the law in the first place. He was gullible enough to be hoodwinked by his own HHS Secretary. He lied about the numbers, made excuses, and now hes hiring the government equivalent of Geek Squad to repair the website.

That's beyond stupid. If you knew anything about software development, you'd know there are times when code goes to production with insufficient testing in order to meet deadlines. It happens. It's neither the preferred path nor the desirable path -- but it happens. And almost always with bad results which get fixed after the system is live. But in no way would I expect a POTUS to be involved at any level of software development. My guess is he knows even less than you about software development.

As far as it being a Canadian company, the development was done by an American subsidiary which has done government work in the past as well.

 

[Faun]

Thanks Amelia

Yes, if he doesn't know the ACA is unconstitutional on many grounds, what can you expect. Denial is denial. The same brain that suppresses dissenting information to bypass "cognitive dissonance" is going to skew anything else that comes in or goes out.

both parties see that the other dismisses their points as invalid or lying.
they can't see they are doing the same from the other side's viewpoint.

If psychologists and political scientists aren't studying this dual phenomena, they should.

It is like living proof that our perceptions are indirectly influenced and co-determined by external perceptions of others or by the collective conscience, and we are limited in our ability to exercise free choice and free thought if we are "stuck" in this dual denial and projection going on. If we can forgive and get past it, it doesn't restrict our perception and decision making abilities. This really should be determined and addressed at the start.

It should be screened and resolved BEFORE making public policy, like other syndromes
similar: the bystander syndrome, the Stockholm syndrome, Munchausen syndrome.

It is some form of projection, where the person is unwilling to change it if (a) they would have to change other things related to it that are not convenient either (b) the other side is not changing their perception so they stay mutually stuck in the same trap

If you think ObamaCare is unconstitutional, you should push to have the U.S. Supreme Court consider that.

..... oh, wait .... they did!

You call that a tax? Pfft.

I call it, "Constitutional."

 

[Amelia]

What do you think he should have done?

Is that a serious question?

A. First he should have set benchmarks and made sure they were being met. If they were not, he should have found out in time to have something done about it.

B. If he still failed to take timely action in the past year, then having been suitably apprised about how woefully unready the site was, he shouldn't have rolled it out. He should have called that A-team in to fix things first.



Having a site which only the most determined people will sign up on could be worse for the future of the ACA than no one being able to sign up. The success of the ACA depends on a substantial volume of healthy people signing up. Among the people dedicated enough to hang on and try as many times as it finally takes, the percentage of unhealthy people could be catastrophically high.

He has been fighting against public perception since 2009. After the passage of the ACA he mounted a campaign to convince people they would like it once they saw what it could do for them. Public approval of the ACA has been under 50% for a long time (forever?). A good public reception of this rollout was vital. And he whiffed.

You clearly know very little, if anything, about software development. Delays, glitches, going live with known problems, encountering unexpected issues; is commonplace. But what is truly absurd is asserting the President of the United States should have been the one "setting benchmarks" and monitoring them. He can take responsibility for it not starting up fully functional and on time since it's a product of his healthcare plan, but he should not have had anything to do with that site other than to delegate others to manage the development of it.

You clearly do not have grounds to judge what I know or don't. He should have made sure it was proceeding well. And since it wasn't, he should have been made aware of it.

This is his signature achievement. He should not have let it launch without being ready.

 

[TemplarKormac]

1. You clearly know very little, if anything, about software development.

2. Delays, glitches, going live with known problems, encountering unexpected issues; is commonplace.

3. But what is truly absurd is asserting the President of the United States should have been the one "setting benchmarks" and monitoring them.

4. He can take responsibility for it not starting up fully functional and on time since it's a product of his healthcare plan, but he should not have had anything to do with that site other than to delegate others to manage the development of it.

1. And neither do you. I on the other hand have some experience in website application and coding. Since when does a website have 5,000 lines of code per page and crash when loaded with only 100 constant connections? Why would you use a Canadian company to code it for you in the first place? What the fuck were these people doing launching a site that wasn't even alpha or beta tested? The software coding is shot, the coding is shot, and that will take probably three to six months to fix at best.

2. I'm sorry, even Robert Gibbs said this was no glitch. ROBERT EFFING GIBBS.

3. It does have his name on it, actually. His signature piece of legislation if I'm not mistaken.

4. Stop making excuses. He may not have known about it, but he should have exercised a bit of forethought before proposing the law in the first place. He was gullible enough to be hoodwinked by his own HHS Secretary. He lied about the numbers, made excuses, and now hes hiring the government equivalent of Geek Squad to repair the website.

That's beyond stupid. If you knew anything about software development, you'd know there are times when code goes to production with insufficient testing in order to meet deadlines. It happens. It's neither the preferred path nor the desirable path -- but it happens. And almost always with bad results which get fixed after the system is live. But in no way would I expect a POTUS to be involved at any level of software development. My guess is he knows even less than you about software development.

As far as it being a Canadian company, the development was done by an American subsidiary which has done government work in the past as well.

The entire thing was never tested!!!! The first rule of website development is TESTING! Alpha testing, beta testing, pre launch testing. You had three freaking years to develop the website with time to test it! My gosh you're an idiot. You think sugarcoating this will make it better? Don't make me laugh!

You have 5,000 lines of code per page on healthcare.gov, it was only tested a few times, and crashed when loaded with 100 login attempts. You hired a CANADIAN development firm with a checkered past to develop it. And even then you still chose to roll it out KNOWING FULL WELL that it was not ready for the big show.

Sigh, there are games I play with servers which can handle millions of connection attempts AT ONCE. Our government should be embarrassed. Obama should be embarrassed to have his name connected to this train wreck.

You are being outdone in internet technology by gamers. Think about that for a minute. Gamers. Blizzard Entertainment for example, runs multiple games across multiple platforms and thus, servers. Diablo III, World of Warcraft and etc. They have millions of players at any given time with all of their games combined. Last year in May they had a similar rollout of Diablo III, the servers were not ready for prime time and the game wasn't available for a week or so. It was fixed in less than a month. Nevertheless, it severely damaged a timeless gaming franchise that had been thriving since the mid 1990's.

The website has numerous software coding issues, on top of that not enough servers were dedicated to handle the amount of users logging in. This will take MONTHS to repair. Not weeks or days.

I swear, I didn't think I would need to start lecturing on rudimentary website application design and coding methodology to someone like you.

 

[TemplarKormac]

If you think ObamaCare is unconstitutional, you should push to have the U.S. Supreme Court consider that.

..... oh, wait .... they did!

You call that a tax? Pfft.

I call it, "Constitutional."

I call it a "failure in judicial jurisprudence".

 

[Faun]

Is that a serious question?

A. First he should have set benchmarks and made sure they were being met. If they were not, he should have found out in time to have something done about it.

B. If he still failed to take timely action in the past year, then having been suitably apprised about how woefully unready the site was, he shouldn't have rolled it out. He should have called that A-team in to fix things first.



Having a site which only the most determined people will sign up on could be worse for the future of the ACA than no one being able to sign up. The success of the ACA depends on a substantial volume of healthy people signing up. Among the people dedicated enough to hang on and try as many times as it finally takes, the percentage of unhealthy people could be catastrophically high.

He has been fighting against public perception since 2009. After the passage of the ACA he mounted a campaign to convince people they would like it once they saw what it could do for them. Public approval of the ACA has been under 50% for a long time (forever?). A good public reception of this rollout was vital. And he whiffed.

You clearly know very little, if anything, about software development. Delays, glitches, going live with known problems, encountering unexpected issues; is commonplace. But what is truly absurd is asserting the President of the United States should have been the one "setting benchmarks" and monitoring them. He can take responsibility for it not starting up fully functional and on time since it's a product of his healthcare plan, but he should not have had anything to do with that site other than to delegate others to manage the development of it.

You clearly do not have grounds to judge what I know or don't. He should have made sure it was proceeding well. And since it wasn't, he should have been made aware of it.

This is his signature achievement. He should not have let it launch without being ready.

Of course I have such grounds. I'm reading what you're posting and it demonstrates a lack of understanding of how software is developed. Especially when there are hard deadlines which have to be met, software often gets released with known issues which get resolved after the system goes live. But the problems with the website are not as bad as tightie righties are screaming about since there are other methods available to sign up. But the right is doing what it does best -- whine incessantly about the left.

 

[TemplarKormac]

1. You clearly know very little, if anything, about software development.

2. Delays, glitches, going live with known problems, encountering unexpected issues; is commonplace.

3. But what is truly absurd is asserting the President of the United States should have been the one "setting benchmarks" and monitoring them.

4. He can take responsibility for it not starting up fully functional and on time since it's a product of his healthcare plan, but he should not have had anything to do with that site other than to delegate others to manage the development of it.

1. And neither do you. I on the other hand have some experience in website application and coding. Since when does a website have 5,000 lines of code per page and crash when loaded with only 100 constant connections? Why would you use a Canadian company to code it for you in the first place? What the fuck were these people doing launching a site that wasn't even alpha or beta tested? The software coding is shot, the coding is shot, and that will take probably three to six months to fix at best.

2. I'm sorry, even Robert Gibbs said this was no glitch. ROBERT EFFING GIBBS.

3. It does have his name on it, actually. His signature piece of legislation if I'm not mistaken.

4. Stop making excuses. He may not have known about it, but he should have exercised a bit of forethought before proposing the law in the first place. He was gullible enough to be hoodwinked by his own HHS Secretary. He lied about the numbers, made excuses, and now hes hiring the government equivalent of Geek Squad to repair the website.

As far as it being a Canadian company, the development was done by an American subsidiary which has done government work in the past as well.

That doesn't mean a damned thing. The CGI firm is still Canadian! If you want to know how bad they are, read this:

Here?s why healthcare.gov broke down

 

[TemplarKormac]

You clearly know very little, if anything, about software development. Delays, glitches, going live with known problems, encountering unexpected issues; is commonplace. But what is truly absurd is asserting the President of the United States should have been the one "setting benchmarks" and monitoring them. He can take responsibility for it not starting up fully functional and on time since it's a product of his healthcare plan, but he should not have had anything to do with that site other than to delegate others to manage the development of it.

You clearly do not have grounds to judge what I know or don't. He should have made sure it was proceeding well. And since it wasn't, he should have been made aware of it.

This is his signature achievement. He should not have let it launch without being ready.

Of course I have such grounds. I'm reading what you're posting and it demonstrates a lack of understanding of how software is developed. Especially when there are hard deadlines which have to be met, software often gets released with known issues which get resolved after the system goes live. But the problems with the website are not as bad as tightie righties are screaming about since there are other methods available to sign up. But the right is doing what it does best -- whine incessantly about the left.

Clearly you are the one who has a massive lack of understanding of website design. I don't develop website, but I am familiar with the concept. Even I know you don't need 5,000 freaking lines of code per page on a website. Second, name examples of people releasing untested and untried websites "to meet a deadline." If you can't have a website coded, developed and tested before any deadline, you have no business coding websites in the first place. Deal with it.

 

[Amelia]

You clearly know very little, if anything, about software development. Delays, glitches, going live with known problems, encountering unexpected issues; is commonplace. But what is truly absurd is asserting the President of the United States should have been the one "setting benchmarks" and monitoring them. He can take responsibility for it not starting up fully functional and on time since it's a product of his healthcare plan, but he should not have had anything to do with that site other than to delegate others to manage the development of it.

You clearly do not have grounds to judge what I know or don't. He should have made sure it was proceeding well. And since it wasn't, he should have been made aware of it.

This is his signature achievement. He should not have let it launch without being ready.

Of course I have such grounds. I'm reading what you're posting and it demonstrates a lack of understanding of how software is developed. Especially when there are hard deadlines which have to be met, software often gets released with known issues which get resolved after the system goes live. But the problems with the website are not as bad as tightie righties are screaming about since there are other methods available to sign up. But the right is doing what it does best -- whine incessantly about the left.

No, you don't know what I know.

This was not ready to go. You're in denial about how bad the problem is.

In any case, the point of this thread is that the president supposedly did not know that this was not ready to go.

No matter how much you try to deflect, it is beyond bizarre that he cared so little and was so disconnected from this most important program that he did not know that it was not ready.

 

[Faun]

1. And neither do you. I on the other hand have some experience in website application and coding. Since when does a website have 5,000 lines of code per page and crash when loaded with only 100 constant connections? Why would you use a Canadian company to code it for you in the first place? What the fuck were these people doing launching a site that wasn't even alpha or beta tested? The software coding is shot, the coding is shot, and that will take probably three to six months to fix at best.

2. I'm sorry, even Robert Gibbs said this was no glitch. ROBERT EFFING GIBBS.

3. It does have his name on it, actually. His signature piece of legislation if I'm not mistaken.

4. Stop making excuses. He may not have known about it, but he should have exercised a bit of forethought before proposing the law in the first place. He was gullible enough to be hoodwinked by his own HHS Secretary. He lied about the numbers, made excuses, and now hes hiring the government equivalent of Geek Squad to repair the website.

That's beyond stupid. If you knew anything about software development, you'd know there are times when code goes to production with insufficient testing in order to meet deadlines. It happens. It's neither the preferred path nor the desirable path -- but it happens. And almost always with bad results which get fixed after the system is live. But in no way would I expect a POTUS to be involved at any level of software development. My guess is he knows even less than you about software development.

As far as it being a Canadian company, the development was done by an American subsidiary which has done government work in the past as well.

The entire thing was never tested!!!! The first rule of website development is TESTING! Alpha testing, beta testing, pre launch testing. You had three freaking years to develop the website with time to test it! My gosh you're an idiot. You think sugarcoating this will make it better? Don't make me laugh!

You have 5,000 lines of code per page on healthcare.gov, it was only tested a few times, and crashed when loaded with 100 login attempts. You hired a CANADIAN development firm with a checkered past to develop it. And even then you still chose to roll it out KNOWING FULL WELL that it was not ready for the big show.

Sigh, there are games I play with servers which can handle millions of connection attempts AT ONCE. Our government should be embarrassed. Obama should be embarrassed to have his name connected to this train wreck.

You are being outdone in internet technology by gamers. Think about that for a minute. Gamers. Blizzard Entertainment for example, runs multiple games across multiple platforms and thus, servers. Diablo III, World of Warcraft and etc. They have millions of players at any given time with all of their games combined. Last year in May they had a similar rollout of Diablo III, the servers were not ready for prime time and the game wasn't available for a week or so. It was fixed in less than a month.

The website has numerous software coding issues, on top of that not enough servers were dedicated to handle the amount of users logging in. This will take MONTHS to repair. Not weeks or days.

I swear, I didn't think I would need to start schooling you on rudimentary website application design and coding methodology to someone like you.

Again, software gets rolled out sometimes with known issues in order to meet deadlines. That you don't know that only serves to demonstrate how little you know about the industry. It's not uncommon for patches to follow a release soon after a launch to fix certain critical bugs.

 

[Faun]

You call that a tax? Pfft.

I call it, "Constitutional."

I call it a "failure in judicial jurisprudence".

Well we do have a judicial system in place where a Supreme Court is empowered to decide what is, and what is not, constitutional.

And that Supreme Court rendered a decision on the constitutionality of ObamaCare .... it's constitutional, no matter what you want to personally call it. That's how our system works.

 

[TemplarKormac]

That's beyond stupid. If you knew anything about software development, you'd know there are times when code goes to production with insufficient testing in order to meet deadlines. It happens. It's neither the preferred path nor the desirable path -- but it happens. And almost always with bad results which get fixed after the system is live. But in no way would I expect a POTUS to be involved at any level of software development. My guess is he knows even less than you about software development.

As far as it being a Canadian company, the development was done by an American subsidiary which has done government work in the past as well.

The entire thing was never tested!!!! The first rule of website development is TESTING! Alpha testing, beta testing, pre launch testing. You had three freaking years to develop the website with time to test it! My gosh you're an idiot. You think sugarcoating this will make it better? Don't make me laugh!

You have 5,000 lines of code per page on healthcare.gov, it was only tested a few times, and crashed when loaded with 100 login attempts. You hired a CANADIAN development firm with a checkered past to develop it. And even then you still chose to roll it out KNOWING FULL WELL that it was not ready for the big show.

Sigh, there are games I play with servers which can handle millions of connection attempts AT ONCE. Our government should be embarrassed. Obama should be embarrassed to have his name connected to this train wreck.

You are being outdone in internet technology by gamers. Think about that for a minute. Gamers. Blizzard Entertainment for example, runs multiple games across multiple platforms and thus, servers. Diablo III, World of Warcraft and etc. They have millions of players at any given time with all of their games combined. Last year in May they had a similar rollout of Diablo III, the servers were not ready for prime time and the game wasn't available for a week or so. It was fixed in less than a month.

The website has numerous software coding issues, on top of that not enough servers were dedicated to handle the amount of users logging in. This will take MONTHS to repair. Not weeks or days.

I swear, I didn't think I would need to start schooling you on rudimentary website application design and coding methodology to someone like you.

Again, software gets rolled out sometimes with known issues in order to meet deadlines. That you don't know that only serves to demonstrate how little you know about the industry. It's not uncommon for patches to follow a release soon after a launch to fix certain critical bugs.

ROFL. You completely dodged me. I know plenty about the industry. This is something a patch will not fix. You can't put band-aids on this and hope it gets better. It's flawed in it's very own source coding!

And the problems this website is having are far from being bugs. You have literally NO idea what you're talking about.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I call it, "Constitutional."

I call it a "failure in judicial jurisprudence".

Well we do have a judicial system in place where a Supreme Court is empowered to decide what is, and what is not, constitutional.

And that Supreme Court rendered a decision on the constitutionality of ObamaCare .... it's constitutional, no matter what you want to personally call it. That's how our system works.

Regardless of the ruling, the law is dying on it's feet as we speak. You need to don your funeral attire, Faun this thing is giving up the ghost any time now. The death of this law will render this failure of judicial jurisprudence moot.

 

[Faun]

You clearly do not have grounds to judge what I know or don't. He should have made sure it was proceeding well. And since it wasn't, he should have been made aware of it.

This is his signature achievement. He should not have let it launch without being ready.

Of course I have such grounds. I'm reading what you're posting and it demonstrates a lack of understanding of how software is developed. Especially when there are hard deadlines which have to be met, software often gets released with known issues which get resolved after the system goes live. But the problems with the website are not as bad as tightie righties are screaming about since there are other methods available to sign up. But the right is doing what it does best -- whine incessantly about the left.

No, you don't know what I know.

This was not ready to go. You're in denial about how bad the problem is.

In any case, the point of this thread is that the president supposedly did not know that this was not ready to go.

No matter how much you try to deflect, it is beyond bizarre that he cared so little and was so disconnected from this most important program that he did not know that it was not ready.

Again, I wouldn't expect a president of the United States to be involved. Given his background is law, I would guess he knows little, if anything, about software development.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Of course I have such grounds. I'm reading what you're posting and it demonstrates a lack of understanding of how software is developed. Especially when there are hard deadlines which have to be met, software often gets released with known issues which get resolved after the system goes live. But the problems with the website are not as bad as tightie righties are screaming about since there are other methods available to sign up. But the right is doing what it does best -- whine incessantly about the left.

No, you don't know what I know.

This was not ready to go. You're in denial about how bad the problem is.

In any case, the point of this thread is that the president supposedly did not know that this was not ready to go.

No matter how much you try to deflect, it is beyond bizarre that he cared so little and was so disconnected from this most important program that he did not know that it was not ready.

Again, I wouldn't expect a president of the United States to be involved. Given his background is law, I would guess he knows little, if anything, about software development.

His background in law? How can he be a "constitutional scholar" but show such utter disdain for it? He can orchestrate devastating presidential campaigns, but he can't craft a sound law. Some "constitutional scholar" he is.